Re: Review remove {join,from}_collapse_limit, add enable_join_ordering
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Review remove {join,from}_collapse_limit, add enable_join_ordering |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 407d949e0907160827j45cc0a8ct98a49f56ddcd3768@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Review remove {join,from}_collapse_limit, add enable_join_ordering (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Review remove {join,from}_collapse_limit, add
enable_join_ordering
Re: Review remove {join,from}_collapse_limit, add enable_join_ordering |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > However, I do observe that this seems a sufficient counterexample > against the theory that we can just remove the collapse limits and let > GEQO save us on very complex queries. On my machine, the example query > takes about 22 seconds to plan using CVS HEAD w/ all default settings. > If I set both collapse_limit variables to very high values (I used 999), > it takes ... um ... not sure; I gave up waiting after half an hour. What's the point of GEQO if it doesn't guarantee to produce the optimal plana and *also* doesn't guarantee to produce some plan, any plan, within some reasonable amount of time? Either we need to fix that or else I don't see what it's buying us over our regular planner which also might not produce a plan within a reasonable amount of time but at least if it does it'll be the right plan. -- greg http://mit.edu/~gsstark/resume.pdf
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: